Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Discovery Moment

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2014 at 15:37:54 (UTC)

Reason: Fine quality image with high ev.
Articles in which this image appears: Space Shuttle Discovery
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator: NASA
Note: For original, there is a similar image File:STS120LaunchHiRes-edit1.jpg which is a FP of Discovery but in STS-120 mission

Support any or all as nominator – The herald 15:37, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not a useful nomination. These are not a coherent set- each adds something different to the article and they really should be judged separately. We don't nominate FAs or FLs by just throwing as many articles/lists at the nomination process as possible, so we shouldn't do the same thing with FPs. J Milburn (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is not a set, there are ALTs. Hafspajen (talk) 18:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think ALTs work that way. GamerPro64 21:57, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not. Split? Hafspajen (talk) 22:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. GamerPro64 01:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely split. None of these make a coherent set, and the technical quality varies greatly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:30, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492:,@J Milburn:,@GamerPro64: & @Hafspajen: Looks fine now??? The herald 07:07, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue no. The purpose of alts is to determine which is the best of very similar images, generally with the same EV. These alts have little in common in their usage or their value. If it's a matter of which image should be used on the article mainspace, then that is usually an issue for that articles talk page -- not the FP project. As for the images themselves, as a rule images which are used in galleries are out, and these because of their incoherence lack a solid argument for EV. Picking a single image, explaining why it adds to the article and letting it stand on its own technical merits is almost always a better way to pass a nomination and improve the project. 24.222.214.125 (talk) 23:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose both The first image is nothing special and is potentially misleading (the space shuttles didn't go anywhere near the moon), and the second photo appears to be tilted and doesn't have great EV either (it also isn't currently in any articles on this Wikipedia). Nick-D (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]